The Daily times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1886-1889, 1887-11-16
THE VIRGINIA CASES.
CLOSE or THE ARG UKENT BEFORE
THE u s SUPREME COURT.
Both Sides Confdent-Mr. Tucker Thinks
the state Officlsls will Certainly be Re
leased disappointment over Conkling.
Speech-A Wild >on-Committal Effort.

WASHINGTON, November 15.-In the
United States Supreme Court to-day the
Virginia hr5cGs corpus cases was resumed,
Mr. Tucker for the petitioners and the
State having the floor. TX Governor
Chamberlain, for the bOndhOlders. OBJ
tained permission to read the decree in a
case which he cited yesterday, and in re-
gard to which was questioned by Justice
Gray. Mr.. Tucker resuming his argu-
ment, maintained that the act of the
Virginia legislature Of 1887 was not, as
had been claimed By the other side, a
defiance Of the decisions Of the Supreme
Court, bul that in fact it was made Ca
conform with these decisions. He held
that In such litigation instead OF steering
as close 10 a violation Of State sovereignty
as possible without conflicting with it
the true policy was TO keep as far away
as possible from such collision.
Mr. Tucker defined the difference be-
tween an infringement OF the rights Of
the citizen by state officers, for which
the officer, 10 his official capacity, could
be held responsible, and the aulhorita-
tive act of the officer In his capacity a. a
representative Of the State He main
tanned that In the case under cOnsidera-
lion the officials were
RFPREsESTISG THE STATE,
and that the proceedings against them
were, in fact, proceedings against the
State. that this was a proceeding against
the sovereign State of Virginia, and not
against certain OF her officials He said
that God only knows what may be the
construction Of the law; that the time
may have come when these "peddlers I'm
coupons the foreign bondholders-may
be able so enjoin the State and tie hel
hands. Ia very earnest language be de-
clared that the present proceedings were
without law, without jurisdiction, and
without power, and said Il at II anything
be had uttered could serve 10 prevent
the invasion OF the recognized rights OF
the States, he would thank God for Oh,
utterance.
The case vas taken under consldera
ton. snd the next on the docket called.
Mr.. TUCKER CONFDENT
After the argument closed and the case
was submitted, star reporter asked ex
Congressman Tucker what he thought O
the prospects lie said he felt c"nnden
that the State officers now held under az
rest for contempt Of court would be re
leased, and that the decision would sus
tain his side Of the case.
MR.. CONKLING CRITICISED.
The argument Of ex-senator ConklIn.
was a decided disappointment TO the Nir
ginia people lie was paid large fee
il is said Sl0,O0O-for his appearance. Ii
regard to Mr. Conking's argument ther'
seems 10 be no difference OF opinion, o
/ ~ expression, al east. among those who
have taken 50 much interest in behalf o
the Virginia officials who have leen com
mitted for contempt u seems 10 have
been expected that Mr. Conkling w0uli
make one Of his greatest efforts; that Do
would put himself on record, before ih'
court "a maintaining that the soyer
! eighty Of a State could not or should mo-
| be invaded. Instead Of that Mr.. COnk
/ ling delivered a very mild aud non-com
initial speech. he did not lay dOwi
any affirmative legal propositions, bu
usually quoted his clients In making
his strongest points, il is said, Mr. Conk
ling would say my clients affirm thi
and so or the petition alleges so anl
so. There is no concealment of the dis
appointment at the ex-Senators argu
ment. and some say that he was not vii
ling 10 put himself on record IN favor %
anything like States rights because o.
| feared that 10 might arise against hln
hereafter. that he is not done with p0iiu
cal ambition, and he was not willing q
say anything that might hurt him IN as
pirations for future political honors.
During the proceedings 20 day Ml
Conkling occupied a seat of to one side O
the bar. apparently taking but little In
leresi in the proceedings.